<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
+1 to Greg. <br>
<br>
Thanks a lot, Greg, this is exactly what is needed to avoid further
misunderstandings. I fully support the language you suggest. The
process shall treat all items of WS2 equally in terms of approval
and a reference to the charter will help. <br>
Many thanks to Holly, too.<br>
Best regards<br>
Tanya <br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 26/04/16 01:08, Greg Shatan wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CA+aOHUSq=tDTsCvZuGbd3pbnaRWu-yAd0nG0XBfp7fL60b2dSQ@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Holly and All,</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">I'm concerned that by
reverting to the language in the Proposal, we are perpetuating
the language that led to confusion in the first place. It
should be clear that this is a "business as usual" process of
Chartering Organization review of a CCWG-Accountability
consensus recommendations, just as was done with the Proposal.
i would suggest adding the following clarifying language:</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><span
style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:12.8px">“(a)
The Core Value set forth in Section 1.2(b)(viii) shall have
no force or effect unless and until a framework of
interpretation for human rights (“FOI-HR”) is approved by
(i) the CCWG-Accountability as a consensus recommendation in
Work Stream 2 </span><i
style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:12.8px"><u><font
color="#000000">(including Chartering Organizations’
approval </font><b><font color="#ff0000">as set forth
in the CCWG-Accountability Charter</font></b><font
color="#000000">), and </font></u></i><span
style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:12.8px"> (ii) </span><s
style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:12.8px">each
of the CCWG-Accountability’s chartering organizations and
(iii)</s><span
style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:12.8px"> the
Board (in the case of the Board, using the same process and
criteria used by the Board to consider the Work Stream 1
Recommendations).”</span><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">I look forward to your
thoughts.</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Greg</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 3:48 PM,
Gregory, Holly <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:holly.gregory@sidley.com" target="_blank">holly.gregory@sidley.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="white" link="blue" vlink="purple" lang="EN-US">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:windowtext">Dear
CCWG-Accountability,
<br>
<br>
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:windowtext">We
have been following this email stream and in
re-reading the language of the Bylaws we understand
how the language could be misread to call for a
standard higher than what is intended. Therefore we
propose that a clarification would be helpful.
Specifically, to remove any confusion and help
assure that the Bylaws are read in a manner that is
consistent with the proposal, we recommend the
following clarifying change to Section 27.3: </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:windowtext"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:windowtext">“(a)
The Core Value set forth in Section 1.2(b)(viii)
shall have no force or effect unless and until a
framework of interpretation for human rights
(“FOI-HR”) is approved by (i) the
CCWG-Accountability as a consensus recommendation in
Work Stream 2 <i>
<u>(including Chartering Organizations’ approval),
and </u></i> (ii) <s>each of the
CCWG-Accountability’s chartering organizations and
(iii)</s> the Board (in the case of the Board,
using the same process and criteria used by the
Board to consider the Work Stream 1
Recommendations).” </span><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:windowtext"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:windowtext"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:windowtext">If
you agree, we recommend that you include this in the
CCWG’s public comment.
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:windowtext"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:windowtext">Kind
regards,
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:windowtext">Holly
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"> </span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">HOLLY</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"> <b>J.
GREGORY</b></span><span style="color:#1f497d"><br>
</span><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Partner
and Co-Chair<br>
Corporate Governance & Executive Compensation
Practice Group</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Sidley
Austin LLP</span></b><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><br>
787 Seventh Avenue<br>
New York, NY 10019<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="tel:%2B1%20212%20839%205853"
value="+12128395853" target="_blank">+1 212 839
5853</a></span><span style="color:#1f497d"><br>
</span><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:holly.gregory@sidley.com"
title="Click to send email to Gregory, Holly"
target="_blank"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:holly.gregory@sidley.com">holly.gregory@sidley.com</a></a></span><span
style="color:#1f497d"><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.sidley.com/"
title="www.sidley.com" target="_blank"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">www.sidley.com</span></a></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.sidley.com/" target="_blank"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";text-decoration:none"><img
moz-do-not-send="true"
src="http://www.sidley.com/files/upload/signatures/SA-autosig.png"
alt="http://www.sidley.com/files/upload/signatures/SA-autosig.png"
border="0" width="35" height="35"></span></a><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"> </span><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">SIDLEY
AUSTIN LLP</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;color:#1f497d"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"> </span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"> </span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #b5c4df
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext">
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org"
target="_blank">accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a>
[mailto:<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org"
target="_blank">accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>McAuley, David<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, April 25, 2016 2:12 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Dr. Tatiana Tropina; <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org"
target="_blank"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org">accountability-cross-community@icann.org</a></a></span></p>
<div>
<div class="h5"><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [CCWG-ACCT] inconsistency in
bylaws spotted</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div class="h5">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> </p>
<p style="margin-left:.5in">In my personal opinion,
I think Tatiana was correct in observing that
there can be different interpretations in this
respect.
</p>
<p style="margin-left:.5in"> </p>
<p style="margin-left:.5in">I respectfully don’t
think we can now say that decision making
regarding the FoI in WS2 is simply based on the
charter. The charter set WS1 in motion and in WS1
we specifically agreed that the HR bylaw will not
enter into force until, among other things, an FoI
is developed as a consensus WS2 recommendation
“(including Chartering Organizations’ approval)” –
we cannot delete that quoted bylaw language as it
means something.
</p>
<p style="margin-left:.5in"> </p>
<p style="margin-left:.5in">Here is what the draft
bylaw-language in the proposal provides:</p>
<p style="margin-left:.5in"> </p>
<p style="margin-left:.5in">“Within its Core Values,
ICANN will commit to respect internationally
recognized Human Rights as required by applicable
law. This provision does not create any additional
obligation for ICANN to respond to or consider any
complaint, request, or demand seeking the
enforcement of Human Rights by ICANN. This Bylaw
provision will not enter into force until (1) a
Framework of Interpretation for Human Rights
(FOI-HR) is developed by the CCWG-Accountability
as a consensus recommendation in Work Stream 2
(including Chartering Organizations’ approval) and
(2) the FOI-HR is approved by the ICANN Board
using the same process and criteria it has
committed to use to consider the Work Stream 1
recommendations.”</p>
<p style="margin-left:.5in"> </p>
<p style="margin-left:.5in">If that requires further
clarity it seems to me that it will need to be
developed in WS2 given that our charge now is to
see if the bylaws draft tracks the final
proposal. In this respect it appears to do so.</p>
<p style="margin-left:.5in"> </p>
<p style="margin-left:.5in">David McAuley</p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"> </span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #b5c4df
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext">
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org"
target="_blank">accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a>
[<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org"
target="_blank">mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Dr. Tatiana Tropina<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Sunday, April 24, 2016 4:42 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org"
target="_blank">accountability-cross-community@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [CCWG-ACCT]
inconsistency in bylaws spotted</span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
Hi all,<br>
I certainly understand that there can be different
interpretations of the intent of the report.
<br>
<br>
The item (ii) of the bylaw in the report says: "<b>consensus
recommendation in Work Stream 2
</b>(including Chartering Organizations’
approval)". <br>
<br>
We have even have different thresholds for
consensus in the report itself, which one is
applicable here? What is the process for reaching
this consensus? The same as for WS1? Then we might
need a reference to WS1 may be? Furthermore: will
everything developed in the WS2 require a full
consensus and approval of all COs? I read the
chapter in the bylaws about WS2 and it refers to
the process and charter of WS1. No requirement for
full consensus or approval of the all the COs
there. Why does not HR bylaw refer to the previous
section in the bylaw that specifically outlines
the requirements for Ws, but introduces the
approval of all COs instead? I don't mind this,
but the clarification seems to be necessary.
<br>
<br>
Is there already a definition of consensus for the
purpose of the WS2 and if yes, is it the same that
has been introduced for HR FOI in HR bylaw text?
This is my question.
<br>
<br>
If the answer is "yes" - then there is no
inconsistency. However, I agree with Niels that
this should be clarified, so we all will be on the
same page.
<br>
<br>
Cheers<br>
Tanya </p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">On
24/04/16 20:44, Seun Ojedeji wrote:</p>
</div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p style="margin-left:.5in">Hi,</p>
<p style="margin-left:.5in">Are you saying that
the bylaw text is different from the intent of
the report as I don't think that is the case.
The report indeed required approval of the CO
which was rightly reflected as item ii in the
bylaw text.</p>
<p style="margin-left:.5in">I therefore think the
bylaw text is consistent with the intent of the
report.</p>
<p style="margin-left:.5in">Regards</p>
<p style="margin-left:.5in">Sent from my LG G4<br>
Kindly excuse brevity and typos</p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">On
24 Apr 2016 7:01 p.m., "Niels ten Oever" <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:lists@nielstenoever.net"
target="_blank"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:lists@nielstenoever.net">lists@nielstenoever.net</a></a>>
wrote:</p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><br>
Dear all,<br>
<br>
I hope this email finds you well. Upon
re-reading the bylaw text I came<br>
across the following issue which does not seem
to be in accordance with<br>
what we agreed in WS1.<br>
<br>
The CCWG report says where it comes to Human
Rights:<br>
<br>
[ccwg report]<br>
<br>
“Within its Core Values, ICANN will commit to
respect internationally<br>
recognized<br>
Human Rights as required by applicable law.
This provision does not<br>
create any<br>
additional obligation for ICANN to respond to
or consider any<br>
complaint, request,<br>
or demand seeking the enforcement of Human
Rights by ICANN. This Bylaw<br>
provision will not enter into force until (1)
a Framework of<br>
Interpretation for Human<br>
Rights (FOI-HR) is developed by the
CCWG-Accountability as a consensus<br>
recommendation in Work Stream 2 (including
Chartering Organizations’<br>
approval)<br>
and (2) the FOI-HR is approved by the ICANN
Board using the same<br>
process and<br>
<br>
criteria it has committed to use to consider
the Work Stream 1<br>
recommendations.”<br>
<br>
[/ccwg report]<br>
<br>
But when I look at the bylaw text it says:<br>
<br>
[proposed bylaw]<br>
<br>
The Core Value set forth in Section
1.2(b)(viii) shall have no force or<br>
effect unless and until a framework of
interpretation for human rights<br>
(“FOI-HR”) is approved by (i) the
CCWG-Accountability as a consensus<br>
recommendation in Work Stream 2, (ii) each of
the CCWG-Accountability’s<br>
chartering organizations and (iii) the Board
(in the case of the Board,<br>
using the same process and criteria used by
the Board to consider the<br>
Work Stream 1 Recommendations).<br>
<br>
[/proposed bylaw]<br>
<br>
Now it is explicitly required that all
Chartering Organizations approve<br>
the Framework of Interpretation, whereas
during WS1 it was agreed that<br>
for WS2 we would use exactly the same process
of approval as for WS1.<br>
<br>
What makes this even more divergent is that
this clause is only added<br>
for Human Rights in the proposed bylaws and
not for any other bylaw.<br>
Whereas there was no exceptional procedure for
human rights discussed<br>
for WS2.<br>
<br>
What I propose is to refer to the charter of
the CCWG on Accountability<br>
for the decision making of all processes in
WS2 (including the decision<br>
making on the FoI on Human Rights) and not
create separate or new<br>
requirements or processes.<br>
<br>
All the best,<br>
<br>
Niels<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
--<br>
Niels ten Oever<br>
Head of Digital<br>
<br>
Article 19<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.article19.org&d=CwMFAg&c=Od00qP2XTg0tXf_H69-T2w&r=1-1w8mU_eFprE2Nn9QnYf01XIV88MOwkXwHYEbF2Y_8&m=CW0HijJt950Jj0TnSs0Uu9zc0aeHn-COr3a24oHd6IM&s=NcvlJyYsf1dukFULmFMt12-UJRg0HtYLbYCN8XiVDjo&e="
target="_blank">www.article19.org</a><br>
<br>
PGP fingerprint 8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4<br>
678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org"
target="_blank">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=CwMFAg&c=Od00qP2XTg0tXf_H69-T2w&r=1-1w8mU_eFprE2Nn9QnYf01XIV88MOwkXwHYEbF2Y_8&m=CW0HijJt950Jj0TnSs0Uu9zc0aeHn-COr3a24oHd6IM&s=Ke7m0Wc1WOPvT-zpltBPQ4xvdcoE_ZdB2l0cdHhY7go&e="
target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
<br>
<br>
</p>
<pre style="margin-left:.5in">_______________________________________________</pre>
<pre style="margin-left:.5in">Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list</pre>
<pre style="margin-left:.5in"><a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org" target="_blank">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:.5in"><a moz-do-not-send="true" href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=CwMFAg&c=Od00qP2XTg0tXf_H69-T2w&r=1-1w8mU_eFprE2Nn9QnYf01XIV88MOwkXwHYEbF2Y_8&m=CW0HijJt950Jj0TnSs0Uu9zc0aeHn-COr3a24oHd6IM&s=Ke7m0Wc1WOPvT-zpltBPQ4xvdcoE_ZdB2l0cdHhY7go&e=" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a></pre>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> </p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p> </p>
<p>****************************************************************************************************<br>
This e-mail is sent by a law firm and may contain
information that is privileged or confidential.<br>
If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the
e-mail and any attachments and notify us<br>
immediately.<br>
<br>
****************************************************************************************************</p>
</div>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>